Reference: Malev v. Comm’r, No. 1282-16S

The Tax Court allowed Victoria Malev to deduct alternative medical procedures not provided by a licensed medical practitioner. The Court cited Tso V. Comm’r stating that nothing in Code Sec 213 or related regulations requires that medical-related treatments be furnished by an individual licensed to practice medicine in any particular discipline or that the services or treatments be provided in person rather than remotely, or that the treatment be successful or universally accepted as effective.  The Court was also positively affected by Malev’s belief as to the effectiveness of the treatments. Furthermore, the Court did consider collaborative statements by Malev’s doctor in support of “integrated medical treatment” crossing various disciplines.